Hello Blog readers,
This week I read Distant Star by Roberto Bolaño. This book was a relatively short novel; my copy consisted of 164 pages, so not that long of a read. However, it was very intriguing. The narration was enjoyable even though the narrator remained unnamed. There are two things I would like to mention in this blog post. Firstly, I wanted to mention the question Jon asks in his lecture about art, and secondly, I wanted to make a quick trip back to the notion of games and their importance within this class.
As Jon mentions in the lecture, “Is what Carlos Wieder produce art? Or is it something else…” There was a lot to think about, and I honestly believe I can still be persuaded to change my mind, so feel free to argue with me if you disagree. However, I think photography is a form of art. Photography is a way that one can express themselves. Although personally, I paint on canvas with oil paint, I see photography, sculptures, literature, music, and much more as art. Thus, no matter what the pictures may be, they are a form of artistic expression. Now, let me say I see Weider as a murderer. After all, he killed people and showed the process of these killings with his pictures. I liked the Garmendia sisters, and Carlos killed them as well, in the name of art. Although this is all very complex, as Jon says, it is like “an artist who knows no limits”. Wieder does not know when he has gone too far. His crimes are displayed as art, and it is the murder that influences his art. Maybe this makes it a murderous regime or fascist art; I am still not 100 percent sure what art this is, just that it is some form of art, just like the skywriting with the planes was art and poetry.
The second thing I wanted to mention was the mention of games in the novel. When I saw the word games written on the pages, I got this nostalgia. It brought me back to our very first class, where we were introduced to the idea of games and the roles of games in literature and life. I feel as though one of the themes of the course is games, as we refer to hopscotch everywhere. Therefore, seeing the narration speaking about the war as a game formed a sense of déjà-vu. Two quotes in particular stuck with me. The first one being, “More fun than monopoly, claimed the advertising, although it was soon apparent to the players that there was a good deal more to the game than mere fun”(109), and the second, “A new strategic war game appeared on the emerging national market and promptly disappeared again”(109). These quotes made me think of the idea of play, monopoly being a fun game, and this war not being fun, but still mentioned as a game to take a bit of the seriousness off. I think referring to such severe historical events as games and evolving play, we can read them more lightheartedly.
My question for the class is, do you agree that the photography presented by Carlos Wieder is art, or not? I love art and would love to discuss this further with anyone.
I'm glad you picked up on the theme of games and play... I do try to return to that theme in lectures, but we don't always (or usually) get to it in class discussion.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that calling something a "war game" means it's not serious, but perhaps it helps us think about the ways that games can also be serious, sometimes even a matter of life and death. The same indeed (to link your two topics) with art: it's not always "mere entertainment," but can also trade in or even cause suffering and hurt.
Hi Melika! In terms of the modern art world it would probably not be considered art but that is due a lot of elitist institutionalisation. On the other hand, the occasional 'outsider art' can make waves often made more popular by the biography of the artist, which preferably includes many hardships that need overcoming. In what is typically considered the 'art world' (which consists of the most influential institutions, which more or less determine what is considered art or not) the artist is almost impossible to separate from the art. So just as important to the question of whether Wieder's photos are art is whether Wieder is an artist or not? Knowledge of the artist is something (right or wrong) that greatly informs the meaning of the work.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I'm not a fan of this elite, institutionalised idea of art classification and meaning making so... my personal stance is that his photos can be considered art because of the intention with which he takes them. He does not take them as a necessity or record keeping but because he wants them. His later exhibiting them and introducing them to an audience is also an assertion of the photos as art. It is exploitative and awful art but does that stop it from being an object imbued with meaning and cultural significance?
Hi Melika! Great post :) Thanks for bringing back the first day of class; honestly, the connection between the theme of the course and the games in the novel had slipped my mind so I appreciate the reminder. Honestly, my opinion also isn't set in stone, and your point regarding Wieder's "crimes [...] displayed as art, and [...] the murder that influences his art" has me rethinking my standpoint on this. I'm inclined to say that the photography exhibition isn't art because murder will always be murder, not art, no matter how the photos (and the bodies) are arranged. I think it's hard for me to get past the inhumane nature of Wieder's crimes to reconsider my response, but I like that your blog post is challenging my perspective.
ReplyDeleteDear Melika, as mentioned by our peers above, you're touching on a perspective-challenging subject here, and I appreciate the openness and well grounded reason for having various answers that you provide above.
ReplyDeleteLike you've said, to me, photography is art. Someone taking pictures is art, if its intended and captured artistically. But when a journalist takes photos of a grotesque battleground, we dont call it art, but maybe acknowledge its sight as important and valuable. However, here, there truly is grotesque intention (the killing for this purpose), but an obvious artistic intent (though way passed the line of sanity) - so I would have a hard time arguing the devil against why this is not simply "uncultured" art... Perhaps I need to think more about this!